Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
1 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,806 Year: 3,063/9,624 Month: 908/1,588 Week: 91/223 Day: 2/17 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   What was God’s plan behind Creation and why does he need one?
hooah212002
Member (Idle past 801 days)
Posts: 3193
Joined: 08-12-2009


Message 151 of 174 (545179)
02-02-2010 2:10 AM
Reply to: Message 147 by 3DSOC
02-02-2010 12:33 AM


Re: God's purpose & why the rules
It seems to me that a species would devote a lot of energy over a multitude of generations to develop organs capable of detecting light - while competing species may be growing larger over the same period of time. This seems to place the first species at a disadvantage to the second and would therefore be at risk of extinction.
You are larger and stronger than a virus, yet they will kill you. Virii also have worse light recepticles (if any, I'll look that up) than you. you are larger and stronger than a snake, yet it can kill you.
Your argument is weaksauce.

Who are we? We find that we live on an insignificant planet of a humdrum star lost in a galaxy tucked away in some forgotten corner of a universe in which there are far more galaxies than people
-Carl Sagan
For me, it is far better to grasp the Universe as it really is than to persist in delusion, however satisfying and reassuring.
-Carl Sagan

This message is a reply to:
 Message 147 by 3DSOC, posted 02-02-2010 12:33 AM 3DSOC has not replied

  
Dr Adequate
Member (Idle past 284 days)
Posts: 16113
Joined: 07-20-2006


Message 152 of 174 (545180)
02-02-2010 2:13 AM
Reply to: Message 147 by 3DSOC
02-02-2010 12:33 AM


It seems to me that a species would devote a lot of energy over a multitude of generations to develop organs capable of detecting light -
How would this "expend energy"? It takes energy to possess an organ, but not, strictly speaking, to evolve it.
It's not like evolution happens as a result of effort on the part of the species.
Why aren't we all sharks?!
You know sharks have eyes, right?
---
Your question is a bit like asking an economist why not everyone is a plumber. It pays well, it's always in demand, you're your own boss, it doesn't take years of study ... why doesn't everyone do it?
And the answer would be rather similar.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 147 by 3DSOC, posted 02-02-2010 12:33 AM 3DSOC has not replied

  
Dr Adequate
Member (Idle past 284 days)
Posts: 16113
Joined: 07-20-2006


Message 153 of 174 (545184)
02-02-2010 4:57 AM
Reply to: Message 147 by 3DSOC
02-02-2010 12:33 AM


Sauce For The Shark Is Sauce For The Dogfish
Why aren't we all sharks?!
Could I point out that if this was a puzzle in biology, it would not particularly be a puzzle for evolutionary biology?
After all, if sharks, thanks to their superior size, strength, pointyness of teeth, or whatever, ought to have driven all other species to extinction, then they would have done so whether they were the product of natural processes or whether God made the original set of species by an act of fiat creation.
The fact that the other species are still around is sufficient to show that there are biological niches for them to inhabit even given the existence of sharks.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 147 by 3DSOC, posted 02-02-2010 12:33 AM 3DSOC has not replied

  
Larni
Member (Idle past 163 days)
Posts: 4000
From: Liverpool
Joined: 09-16-2005


Message 154 of 174 (545188)
02-02-2010 5:19 AM
Reply to: Message 132 by 3DSOC
02-01-2010 5:19 PM


Re: God's purpose & why the rules
What did you think of the new StarTrek?
I liked it very much indead. A good reboot.
What about the points I raised?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 132 by 3DSOC, posted 02-01-2010 5:19 PM 3DSOC has not replied

  
Drosophilla
Member (Idle past 3640 days)
Posts: 172
From: Doncaster, yorkshire, UK
Joined: 08-25-2009


Message 155 of 174 (545209)
02-02-2010 8:38 AM
Reply to: Message 147 by 3DSOC
02-02-2010 12:33 AM


Re: God's purpose & why the rules
Hi 3DSOC
It seems to me that a species would devote a lot of energy over a multitude of generations to develop organs capable of detecting light - while competing species may be growing larger over the same period of time. This seems to place the first species at a disadvantage to the second and would therefore be at risk of extinction.
You seem to think that evolution involves creatures 'thinking' about what new adaptations they need and then growing them using the requisite energy.
However, evolution is very far from this. There is no thought and no direction. Random mutations (which happens all the time in all organisms) are selected by the environment (it's not even the environment 'thinking' either) for good effects that enhance the animals chance of getting to reproduction age - that's all that matters in evolution - will the animal reproduce and pass on its genes or not.
Example; The ancestor of the giraffe with necks more like that of other grazing herbivores would have raised their heads to chew on leaves of shrubs and small trees such as acacias. If a mutation occurred that gives an animal a slightly longer neck then that animal can reach leaves others can't - that's the environmental advantage that allows it to get to adulthood where others may starve. The environment favours the adaptation and no planning is involved. In this way successive mutations build and the neck increases over time to what we have today.
Why aren't giraffe necks 200 feet tall then to get the tops of the trees? I'm sure you can work this one out. Adaptations come at physiological costs - a neck that tall couldn't be supported by the rest of the body and would lead to predators taking them easier.
You also appear to have a fixation on 'stronger/bigger' for some reason. Do you know which life-form has been around the longest? Bacteria.
Which constitute the greatest number on the planet today? Bacteria - by several orders of magnitude.
Which life-form can adapt fastest to adverse changes in environment and so survive to a high degree? Bacteria.
On a multi-cellular life basis the insects are far far more successful than any other animal and certainly more so than others many times their size.
Size and strength are very poor indicators of biological success and evolutionary adaptation.
I strongly recommend that you read some biology text books before carrying on with this subject.....a good one would be Richard Dawkins "Climbing Mount Improbable" where Dawkins introduces the reader to how adaptations build and why Darwin's theory holds so much power.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 147 by 3DSOC, posted 02-02-2010 12:33 AM 3DSOC has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 162 by 3DSOC, posted 02-03-2010 10:37 PM Drosophilla has not replied

  
Jumped Up Chimpanzee
Member (Idle past 4941 days)
Posts: 572
From: UK
Joined: 10-22-2009


Message 156 of 174 (545225)
02-02-2010 11:57 AM


Can anyone answer the original question?
There have been a lot of posts under this topic, but I've just scanned through them all again and can't find any direct answers to my original question (other than "I don't know").
Does anyone have any direct answers, or can they point me to a previous message I may have missed that they consider is a direct answer?
I find it somewhat surprising that there doesn't seem to be any clear answer to what the purpose was behind the alleged creation, considering how important the whole subject is to some people - some of them blow planes up for Christ's sake (or Allah's sake).

Replies to this message:
 Message 157 by Coragyps, posted 02-02-2010 12:41 PM Jumped Up Chimpanzee has not replied

  
Coragyps
Member (Idle past 734 days)
Posts: 5553
From: Snyder, Texas, USA
Joined: 11-12-2002


Message 157 of 174 (545230)
02-02-2010 12:41 PM
Reply to: Message 156 by Jumped Up Chimpanzee
02-02-2010 11:57 AM


Re: Can anyone answer the original question?
Does anyone have any direct answers,
The catechism I was exposed to about five decades ago did - everything is here so that we humans can "glorify God and praise Him."
Is that an unsatisfying answer, or what? I thought it sucked then, and I was a prepubescent missionary brat.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 156 by Jumped Up Chimpanzee, posted 02-02-2010 11:57 AM Jumped Up Chimpanzee has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 158 by hawkes nightmare, posted 02-02-2010 8:56 PM Coragyps has not replied
 Message 159 by Taq, posted 02-02-2010 9:04 PM Coragyps has not replied

  
hawkes nightmare
Junior Member (Idle past 5028 days)
Posts: 28
Joined: 01-26-2010


Message 158 of 174 (545289)
02-02-2010 8:56 PM
Reply to: Message 157 by Coragyps
02-02-2010 12:41 PM


Re: Can anyone answer the original question?
no one really knows WHAT his plan is- until they die, of course. then maybe God fills in the gaps. the only absolute answer is the one in the catechism, and that one is just confusing.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 157 by Coragyps, posted 02-02-2010 12:41 PM Coragyps has not replied

  
Taq
Member
Posts: 9970
Joined: 03-06-2009
Member Rating: 5.6


Message 159 of 174 (545292)
02-02-2010 9:04 PM
Reply to: Message 157 by Coragyps
02-02-2010 12:41 PM


Re: Can anyone answer the original question?
The catechism I was exposed to about five decades ago did - everything is here so that we humans can "glorify God and praise Him."
Is that an unsatisfying answer, or what? I thought it sucked then, and I was a prepubescent missionary brat.
This former protestant was given the same boilerplate answers. After a while I just nodded my head and went through the motions. Looking back I wonder how many other members of that congregation were doing the same.
It just seems really weird that an all powerful, all knowing creator would produce a massive universe just so one day he could get pissed off watching a hairy little primate teen ager whacking off in a tiny little corner of the Universe. Billions of galaxies, each with billions of stars, each with planets of their own, and this supreme creator is worried about us eating pork? Sometimes it's a little hard to figure out.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 157 by Coragyps, posted 02-02-2010 12:41 PM Coragyps has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 160 by DevilsAdvocate, posted 02-02-2010 10:05 PM Taq has not replied

  
DevilsAdvocate
Member (Idle past 3100 days)
Posts: 1548
Joined: 06-05-2008


Message 160 of 174 (545296)
02-02-2010 10:05 PM
Reply to: Message 159 by Taq
02-02-2010 9:04 PM


Re: Can anyone answer the original question?
It just seems really weird that an all powerful, all knowing creator would produce a massive universe just so one day he could get pissed off watching a hairy little primate teen ager whacking off in a tiny little corner of the Universe. Billions of galaxies, each with billions of stars, each with planets of their own, and this supreme creator is worried about us eating pork? Sometimes it's a little hard to figure out.
The sad thing is the humans have done this to ourselves. Humans invented the most beligerent, murderous, cruel, tyrant of all time and then willingly bow down and worship such a horrific being, imaginary though he is and some points in history have made other unwilling participants worship this imaginary jerk by the point of the sword.

One of the saddest lessons of history is this: If we've been bamboozled long enough, we tend to reject any evidence of the bamboozle. We're no longer interested in finding out the truth. The bamboozle has captured us. It is simply too painful to acknowledge -- even to ourselves -- that we've been so credulous. - Carl Sagan, The Fine Art of Baloney Detection
"You can't convince a believer of anything; for their belief is not based on evidence, it's based on a deep seated need to believe." - Carl Sagan
"It is far better to grasp the Universe as it really is than to persist in delusion, however satisfying and reassuring." - Carl Sagan, The Demon-Haunted World

This message is a reply to:
 Message 159 by Taq, posted 02-02-2010 9:04 PM Taq has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 161 by Jumped Up Chimpanzee, posted 02-03-2010 4:45 AM DevilsAdvocate has not replied

  
Jumped Up Chimpanzee
Member (Idle past 4941 days)
Posts: 572
From: UK
Joined: 10-22-2009


Message 161 of 174 (545308)
02-03-2010 4:45 AM
Reply to: Message 160 by DevilsAdvocate
02-02-2010 10:05 PM


Re: Can anyone answer the original question?
The sad thing is the humans have done this to ourselves. Humans invented the most beligerent, murderous, cruel, tyrant of all time and then willingly bow down and worship such a horrific being, imaginary though he is and some points in history have made other unwilling participants worship this imaginary jerk by the point of the sword.
Funny, that's exactly what I had suspected!
I just thought it reasonable to give the other side a chance (again) to explain, in case there was something I'd missed.
It seems we can now conclude that we have:
A supernatural creator - though we don't know what it actually is;
That created the universe - though we don't know how it did it;
That had a purpose - but we don't know what that is either.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 160 by DevilsAdvocate, posted 02-02-2010 10:05 PM DevilsAdvocate has not replied

  
3DSOC
Junior Member (Idle past 5164 days)
Posts: 26
Joined: 01-24-2010


Message 162 of 174 (545502)
02-03-2010 10:37 PM
Reply to: Message 155 by Drosophilla
02-02-2010 8:38 AM


Re: God's purpose & why the rules
Drosophilla, Larni, DrJones and Dr Adequate,
You all have made several good points and have shed light on this topic.
Allow me to share a passage from Darwin himself about sight;
"...if numerous gradations from a perfect and complex eye to one very imperfect and simple, each grade being useful to its possessor, can be shown to exist; if further, the eye does vary ever so slightly, and the variations be inherited, which is certainly the case; and if any variation or modification in the organ be ever useful to an animal under changing conditions of life, then the difficulty of believing that a perfect and complex eye could be formed by natural selection, though insuperable by our imagination, can hardly be considered real." - 'Origin of Species'
I am not comparing myself in any way to Darwin, I just think he stated what I see as a "problem" better than my posts.
Obviously Darwin looked at the world and saw that lots of creatures had developed sight, so if his theory of evolution is correct, then evolution did, somehow overcome this 'insuperable' challenge. Whether you believe natural selection to be real or not, doesn't make it true or false.
I'm stuck on the "if" part. Has the evidence proven;
1. That these gradations exist?
I understand the adage that "A lack of evidence doesn't meant there is a lack of evidence", so if the current evidence doesn't provide for these gradations, that doesn't mean evidence won't be discovered.
2. That each minor mutation was useful to it possessor?
If these mutations didn't benefit the possessor, then they would not have survived, natural selection wouldn't favor them.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 155 by Drosophilla, posted 02-02-2010 8:38 AM Drosophilla has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 164 by Dr Adequate, posted 02-04-2010 4:15 AM 3DSOC has replied

  
3DSOC
Junior Member (Idle past 5164 days)
Posts: 26
Joined: 01-24-2010


Message 163 of 174 (545506)
02-03-2010 11:23 PM
Reply to: Message 122 by Larni
01-31-2010 3:26 PM


Re: God's purpose & why the rules
Larni writes:
3DSOC writes:
God isn't doing this,
Yes he is. What act of will by a human causes a baby to be born with phenylketonuria?
What about people being killed in storms and tsunamis? You point that it is all down to people making bad choices will eventually lead you back to Adam and if you have read this thread you will see that his has already been dealt with.
3DOSC writes:
Likewise, if I decide to become a heroine addict and use all my financial resources to feed my addiction instead of feeding my family, it isn't God who is condemning my children, it is I.
So Yahweh sits and watches one of his children's free will removed by their parent without lifting a finger?
Good old, loving Yahweh.
But it's all part of the plan; people can only learn through the heavenly gift of suffering. Even when Yahweh was trying to do humanity a good turn he could only do it using suffering.
Does he have no other mechanism to exert his will other than suffering?
Forgive me, but I don't know what you mean by you've 'dealt' with Adam.
To your point though about illness; Couldn't an act of will by humans discover a cure for phenylketonuria? Couldn't an act of will by a human rescue a family whose parent(s) have become addicted? Couldn't an act of will by humans develop better early warning systems for tsunamis? better evacuation plans for areas about to hit by a hurricane? Imagine what the world would be like if countries spent money on health care and education instead of defense.
If humans actually 'loved their neighbor as themselves', would people still die in natural disasters? Yes. Would people still die from accidents? illness? Yes.
Now before you think I'm painting a 'isn't life just rosey!' picture of life, suffering sucks. Losing a loved one because of a drunk driver sucks. Watching your little daughter suffer from seizures sucks. Finding out that your new born baby boy is deaf sucks.
How a person responds to their situation is bigger than the situation itself.
God's mechanism of choice is actually 'a still, small voice'
Problem is, its easy to let the noise of life drowned it out, so people ignore Him, myself included.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 122 by Larni, posted 01-31-2010 3:26 PM Larni has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 165 by Larni, posted 02-04-2010 6:59 AM 3DSOC has replied

  
Dr Adequate
Member (Idle past 284 days)
Posts: 16113
Joined: 07-20-2006


Message 164 of 174 (545525)
02-04-2010 4:15 AM
Reply to: Message 162 by 3DSOC
02-03-2010 10:37 PM


Eye Evolution
I am not comparing myself in any way to Darwin, I just think he stated what I see as a "problem" better than my posts.
Obviously Darwin looked at the world and saw that lots of creatures had developed sight, so if his theory of evolution is correct, then evolution did, somehow overcome this 'insuperable' challenge.
He didn't say that it was a problem. He says, as you quoted, that "the difficulty [...] can hardly be considered real."
What he says is insuperably difficult is for people to imagine it happening. He was right about that too.
Has the evidence proven;
1. That these gradations exist?
Yes. We can see a whole range of eyes in nature, from the simplest to the most complex. In some cases we can see the whole range within a single phylum --- mollusks are the usual example, but this is also true of jellyfish.
2. That each minor mutation was useful to it possessor?
Nilssen and Pelger (here) have shown that there is a pathway from the simplest eye to the most complex such that each small step is an improvement. To quote their paper:
The model sequence is made such that every part of it, no matter how small, results in an increase of the spatial information the eye can detect.
So such a pathway will be favored by natural selection for so long as the benefits of increased visual acuity outweigh the costs to the organism of producing the eye.
For further information, I suggest this article on eye evolution, a work of such penetrating insight and erudite genius that I can only say ... I wrote it.
Edited by Dr Adequate, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 162 by 3DSOC, posted 02-03-2010 10:37 PM 3DSOC has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 168 by 3DSOC, posted 02-04-2010 9:52 PM Dr Adequate has replied

  
Larni
Member (Idle past 163 days)
Posts: 4000
From: Liverpool
Joined: 09-16-2005


Message 165 of 174 (545538)
02-04-2010 6:59 AM
Reply to: Message 163 by 3DSOC
02-03-2010 11:23 PM


Re: God's purpose & why the rules
Couldn't an act of will by humans discover a cure for phenylketonuria? Couldn't an act of will by a human rescue a family whose parent(s) have become addicted? Couldn't an act of will by humans develop better early warning systems for tsunamis? better evacuation plans for areas about to hit by a hurricane? Imagine what the world would be like if countries spent money on health care and education instead of defense.
The point is that Yahweh decides that these people need to be punished for no good reason!
Yahweh can do anything; he can achieve his aims without imposing all the horrible things that you say we should 'choose' to eradicate. This implies that it is our fault we can cure the plagues Yahweh plagues us with.
Forgive me, but I don't know what you mean by you've 'dealt' with Adam.
See post 65

This message is a reply to:
 Message 163 by 3DSOC, posted 02-03-2010 11:23 PM 3DSOC has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 167 by 3DSOC, posted 02-04-2010 9:44 PM Larni has replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024